[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Foodista, evan short, Barnaby Dorfman, Jess Behrens, NaturesGardenDeliver and others. NaturesGardenDeliver said: Of course we deliver both LOCAL and ORGANIC foods. But if you had to choose, which means more to you: Local or... http://fb.me/If1vWTdv [...]
I picked local, especially since many smaller farmers can't afford all the details that go with being certified organic, but they do strive to be as natural as they can. Besides, the impact is much less. I would, however, like to talk to each farmer and find out what methods they use. Something you can't find out from chatting up an organic squash at the store!
I completely disagree with your premise. Unless you mean "dream world" when you say "perfect world". Because local and organic and affordable may not always go hand in hand.
If you REALLY wanted to eat local, then the price for any other substance you may use (natural or not) will go up, because the market will be smaller. It is a simple fact of economic.
I think it is wrong and counterproductive to convince people that local and organic food should be cheap. Because they really are not. And they shouldn't necessarily be.
Local, as it's easier to trace the product and talk directly to the grower. I like being idea of being one degree of separation away from the soil itself. The less, the better for me.
I would by local. Organic is nice, but perhaps not as regulated as it should be, and small farmer's can't always afford to be organic. Since small farmer's are a dying breed I try to help them out whenever I can!
This is a tough one and Sheila has made a valuable point in the fact that going organic cuts int profit and farmers are under so much pressure to produce more for less that its practially infaesible to break away from using chemicals.
There needs to be more respsonsibiltiy from supermarkets to push organic produce and to source their goods with locality in mind. Sadly, this does not support the business models that are so hard to shift and I'd be surprised we'd ever see anything like this happen on a major scale across the board in our lifetime.
To be brutally honest, I don't pick local - not out of choice, its just out of convenience and cost. I live in London and I don't know where most of my food comes from (ok, the supermarket) and I just pick what they put in the produce section or what comes in the van when they drop it by.
If I could I would, but as I said, I find it hard to believe this could ever be practiacally implemented.
Local has an edge in my mind. I just finished reading "Eating for Beginners" by Melanie Rehak which gave me more food for thought about this very subject.
Comments
September 30, 2010
I would like to do more of both, but honestly? Organic and local stuff is usually priced at more than my budget can take.
September 30, 2010
[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Foodista, evan short, Barnaby Dorfman, Jess Behrens, NaturesGardenDeliver and others. NaturesGardenDeliver said: Of course we deliver both LOCAL and ORGANIC foods. But if you had to choose, which means more to you: Local or... http://fb.me/If1vWTdv [...]
September 30, 2010
I picked local, especially since many smaller farmers can't afford all the details that go with being certified organic, but they do strive to be as natural as they can. Besides, the impact is much less. I would, however, like to talk to each farmer and find out what methods they use. Something you can't find out from chatting up an organic squash at the store!
October 1, 2010
I completely disagree with your premise. Unless you mean "dream world" when you say "perfect world". Because local and organic and affordable may not always go hand in hand.
If you REALLY wanted to eat local, then the price for any other substance you may use (natural or not) will go up, because the market will be smaller. It is a simple fact of economic.
I think it is wrong and counterproductive to convince people that local and organic food should be cheap. Because they really are not. And they shouldn't necessarily be.
October 1, 2010
Local, as it's easier to trace the product and talk directly to the grower. I like being idea of being one degree of separation away from the soil itself. The less, the better for me.
October 2, 2010
Bad question! It isn't necessary or helpful to choose.
October 3, 2010
I would by local. Organic is nice, but perhaps not as regulated as it should be, and small farmer's can't always afford to be organic. Since small farmer's are a dying breed I try to help them out whenever I can!
October 4, 2010
This is a tough one and Sheila has made a valuable point in the fact that going organic cuts int profit and farmers are under so much pressure to produce more for less that its practially infaesible to break away from using chemicals.
There needs to be more respsonsibiltiy from supermarkets to push organic produce and to source their goods with locality in mind. Sadly, this does not support the business models that are so hard to shift and I'd be surprised we'd ever see anything like this happen on a major scale across the board in our lifetime.
To be brutally honest, I don't pick local - not out of choice, its just out of convenience and cost. I live in London and I don't know where most of my food comes from (ok, the supermarket) and I just pick what they put in the produce section or what comes in the van when they drop it by.
If I could I would, but as I said, I find it hard to believe this could ever be practiacally implemented.
October 4, 2010
Local has an edge in my mind. I just finished reading "Eating for Beginners" by Melanie Rehak which gave me more food for thought about this very subject.
October 6, 2010
[...] Local or Organic? [...]
Pages